Movable barriers of various kinds are known in the art, including but not limited to horizontally and vertically sliding barriers, vertically and horizontally pivoting barriers, single-piece barriers, multi-piece or segmented barriers, partial barriers, complete barriers, rolling shutters, and various combinations and permutations of the above. Such barriers are typically used to control physical and/or visual access to or via an entryway (or exit) such as, for example, a doorway to a building or an entry point for a garage.
In many cases, a motor or other motion-imparting mechanism is utilized to effect selective movement of such a movable barrier. A movable barrier operator will then usually be utilized to permit control of the motion-imparting mechanism. In some cases a user may control the movable barrier operator by assertion of one or more control surfaces that are physically associated with the movable barrier operator. In other cases such control can be effected by the transmission of a wireless remote control signal to the movable barrier operator.
Such movable barrier operators often serve in part to monitor one or more parameters that correspond to force as is applied when moving such a movable barrier. On the one hand, it is desirable to supply sufficient force to ensure that the movable barrier will be able to successfully traverse its entire travel path. This can require, in turn, the need to apply a higher then normally required sufficient force in order to permit the movable barrier to move through areas that, for a variety of possible reasons, present greater resistance to movement of the movable barrier. On the other hand, a moving movable barrier can potentially come into contact with an obstacle.
When an obstacle occasions resistance to movement of the movable barrier, significantly increasing the applied force can potentially lead to damaging the movable barrier, the obstacle, or both. Consequently, many movable barriers closely monitor applied force in order to ascertain when a potentially inappropriate level of force is being applied to thereby permit a safe response.
To facilitate this monitoring, a maximum-force-applied limit will often be used to serve as an upper limit and reference value. Such a limit may be wholly static, manually alterable by a user, and/or automatically dynamically set and/or adjustable by the movable barrier operator itself.
Obstacle detectors are also known in the art Such detectors serve to detect the likely presence of such an obstacle. When an obstacle is detected, the movable barrier operator can then take proactive steps to avoid damage to the movable barrier and to the obstacle. It is generally understood and accepted that a movable barrier operator having a corresponding obstacle detector can safely use a relatively high maximum-force-applied limit, as the risk potentially associated with the higher limit is safely mitigated by the availability of the obstacle detector. Conversely, when a movable barrier operator does not have a corresponding obstacle detector, the corresponding maximum-force-applied limit will tend to be a lower value in order to better minimize the risk of damage should contact with an obstacle occur.
Manufacturers and installers tend to prefer flexible and multi-feature capable movable barrier operator platforms, as this eases inventory and manufacturing issues, permits better economies of scale, simplifies installation and servicing knowledge and training needs, and so forth. Unfortunately, such a desire conflicts with the issues noted above regarding the use of relatively lower and higher maximum-force-applied limits depending upon the availability of an obstacle detector. Such a need tends to urge such manufacturers towards fielding two or more movable barrier operator platforms in order to best support these divergent needs. It may also be noted that other pressures, including legal, regulatory, and/or certification requirements or standards can also presently influence such manufacturers towards multiple divergent and incompatible platforms to support the use of differing maximum-force-level practices depending upon the use of obstacle detectors.
Skilled artisans will appreciate that elements in the figures are illustrated for simplicity and clarity and have not necessarily been drawn to scale. For example, the dimensions of some of the elements in the figures may be exaggerated relative to other elements to help to improve understanding of various embodiments of the present invention. Also, common but well-understood elements that are useful or necessary in a commercially feasible embodiment are typically not depicted in order to facilitate a less obstructed view of these various embodiments of the present invention.